Posted on 11/08/2002 10:59:18 AM PST by winner45
You'll either give us the time of day or stand proven as a hypocrit. Or should we assume that you approve of candidates who say one thing to get elected, then do the opposite once you are in office?
Government grew more rapidly under Nixon, Reagan, Ford or Bush because of the DEMOCRAT controlled congress.
If that's the case, we should expect different results now?
A little hard to when he cites no empircal evidence of his allegations, which are all phrased in a "When did you stop beating your wife and dog" sort of double-speak.
Browne lost my respect when he began to write more and more of these types of articles, which do nothing to truly articulate the percieved problem, and offer nothing in return. Some of his claims have gone further and further off the deep end in the process.
Add to that the constant foolishness of some LP candidates/representatives (i.e., Mr. Smurf in Montana, and the Spitting Candidate in California), and the LP's credibility begins to sink to near the level of Lyndon LaRouche and his ilk.
While I have no problem supporting some of the issues of true libertarianism (little "l"), the LP is nothing more than a laughing stock as far as I am concerned. And as such, attacks posing as position papers like this one do not serve much more than to reenforce the increasing fringe perception that the LP has earned of late.
Hypocrite? I knew exactly who and what I was voting for on Tuesday. You, OTOH, voted for losers, people like Harry Browne whose "blame America" stance after 9/11 assures that he will get even fewer votes than he did in 2000 if the Libertarians are goofy enough to nominate him.
Or should we assume that you approve of candidates who say one thing to get elected, then do the opposite once you are in office?
I approve of candidates who will do what they say they're going to do, not embrace the dictates of a bunch of losers who didn't even vote for them.
Did you see that, for the first time in 13 years, the Libertarians won't have a slot on future Texas ballots? They didn't get 5% in any race, so they're out!
Why should you give me the time of day? Because I'd like to vote for your party, I just can't vote for the people you currently run. I will vote for RLC candidates over my own party when I have the chance. Maybe you'd like to help them get on the ballot?
C'mon sink. You know the crowd Harry Browne articles draw. Vote? Some of these guys wouldn't take a chance coming out of their bunker long enough to vote.
And the answer is < drumroll > Giddy Dole!
She's a prime example of a big government carreer politician and the poster child for what's wrong with the Republican party
Well, the very first meaningful change that will be made is that the Department of Homeland Security will become the law of the land.
And I , for one, don't like the meaning...
not one bit.
What do you thin I'm talking about you abrasive moron! Will the Republicans stick to their "smaller government" promises? It is going back on such promises that drove me from the Republican party to begin with. I cannot tolerate a LIAR.
How, in even your twisted mind, is that kowtowing to libertarian ideals? All they have to do to gain my support is stick to their own damn promises.
Is that so effing hard?
I vote Republican. Period. I'm not really interested in putting a competitor on the ballot, especially one with the potential to drain support from Republicans.
The clock is ticking? It's been about 61 hours since the Republicans have been assured of taking control of the Senate this next year and we have heard from Republicans:
-partial birth abortion is going to be banned
-we need to get the judicial nominees to the full Senate ASAP
-we need to defend our borders with troops if needed
-A trial balloon has gone up talking about scrapping the IRS and the tax code
How much faster do you think the Republicans can put out statements of what they want to do?
I voted for the most conservative candidates on the slate Tuesday; as it happens, they were all Republicans. Some of them won.
But don't read it as carte blanche support for the GOP.
If you didn't, I don't see why those of us who did should give you the time of day.
Hell of a way to defend your positions. I guess you will be first in line with the excuses.
Um, RLC members are Republicans. Small government, constitutional Republicans. What could be wrong with that?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.